In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.515/2012.
1) Kartik Chandra Dhar,
F-3, Arabinda Nagar, P.O. Midnapore,
Dist. Paschim Midnapore, Pin-721101. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) P.S. Trading
Represented by its proprietor,
Mr. Prabir Mitra,
22/1, Chandra Nath Chatterjee Street,
Bhowanipur, Kolkata-25. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Order No. 9 Dated 25/09/2013.
We have gone through the pleadings of the complainant, evidence and documents in particular and we find that o.p. is a proprietorship concern carrying on business of supplying cube testing machine including other machines.
Complainant states that he has purchased one Cube Testing Machine for improvement of quality of construction work in remote v ilage. The complainant further states that he has purchased the said machine for his self-employment.
Complainant further states that the complainant has purchased the said machine by making payment of Rs.44880/- including vat and freight charges. The complainant further states that the said machine was delivered by o.ps. through transport at the address of the complainant and the transport charges was also received by o.ps.
Complainant further states that after receiving the said machine the complainant tried to use the same but the machine was found defective and the same could not be operated for a single day.
Complainant made a complaint before the Asstt. Director, Consumer CA & FBP, Kolkata South Regional Office, for redressal of his grievance. On receipt of the said complainant a notice dt.11.9.12 was issued upon the o.p. by the Asstt. Director, CA & FBP, Kolkata South Region for resolving the instant dispute through the process of mediation. Despite receipt of the said notice the o.p. did not turn up for mediation and ultimately the said dispute remained unresolved. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.p. did not contest this case by filing w/v and matter was heard ex parte against the o.p.
Decision with reasons:-
In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that o.p. had sufficient deficiency in service being service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed ex parte with cost against the o.p. O.p. is directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 44,880/- (Rupees forty four thousand eight hundred eighty) only as cost of the machine and to pay Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) only as compensation for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
The complainant is also directed to return the machine in question within 15 days from the date of realization on the entire amount as af9oresaid, if it is still with the possession of the complainant.
